Interesting Story, If True

So Israel has publicly denied they seriously contemplated a strike against Iran and her nuclear facilities given the current intelligence. This claim has been echoed by American sources, like Leon Panetta.

And yet…

THE head of Israel’s foreign intelligence service made a secret trip to Washington this month to gauge the likely US reaction to a unilateral Israeli strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities.

The content of Mossad chief Tamir Pardo’s discussion with his American counterparts has been revealed in a Newsweek article titled ”Obama’s Dangerous Game With Iran”.

Unnamed US officials claim that Mr Pardo’s line of questioning to David Petraeus, the CIA chief, ran: ”What is our [US] posture on Iran? Are we ready to bomb? Would we [do so later]? What does it mean if [Israel] does it anyway?”

That certainly sounds like the contemplation of an imminent attack to me.

Much of this alarm is centered on the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) report last fall that suggested strongly that Iran was developing a weapons program. Iran has denied that, claiming any nuclear facility development was for peaceful purposes, like domestic energy requirements.

The IAEA has been strangely reticent in the wake of preliminary talks last week, to characterize Iran’s defense, saying only that the talks were “good” and that more talks will take place next week.

A clearer picture, however, is given by the reactions of both French and Chinese diplomats have been urging Iran to better cooperate with the IAEA inspectors, who may already have a report in the pipeline that paints a not-flattering picture of Iran.

Today’s events make it likely that Iranian policy will stiffen.

About author View all posts

Actor 212

7 CommentsLeave a comment

  • Israel has both said it can’t attack Iran because it doesn’t have the means/attack won’t work, and that it will attack. The U.S. has said pretty much the same things. The calculation is that this ambiguity serves better to disorient the Iranians and force them to the negotiating table as their only way of opening the box and seeing what the cat’s up to.

  • They pursue an ambiguous policy approach as well? Supposedly encouraging Assad and Iran to talk all the while vetoing UN resolutions?

    As Obama forces the corporate world to reinvest in the U.S. then the U.S. economy strengthens to afford a better military/economic world stance to back the U.S. bluff against the RIC bluff.

    And Obama pursues an ambiguous hope-all-around policy that suggests stiffening against Iran for the U.S. military even as he pursues draw downs in Iraq and Afghanistan for election time voters. So is Obama bluffing about avoiding a war with Iran?

  • at this point, since part of the strategic ambiguity gambit is never edmitting you’re doing it. But the preponderance of the top brass of the US military seem to be against any conventional war with Iran (JSOC and CIA’s mileage may differ) as does Obama (again, HRC may not feel the same way).

  • …(really it would likely be a small part of JSOC in the form of the ISA), their involvement would be in conducting quite unconventional warfare. JSOC bread and butter tactics would be off the table.

    In combat one should be very suspicious of painless moral choices. When you are confronted with a seemingly painless moral choice, the odds are that you haven’t looked deeply enough.” ~ Karl Marlantes

  • I also intended to imply that CIA director General David Petraeus may be more hawkish on Iran than anyone senior at the Pentagon, and he has a known preference for special ops.

  • …I would tend to view him as an “action at a distance” kind of guy. That was how they went after the Iranian end of the EFP nets. What can he act upon, primarily outside Iran, that would cause specific decision making inside Iran.

    In combat one should be very suspicious of painless moral choices. When you are confronted with a seemingly painless moral choice, the odds are that you haven’t looked deeply enough.” ~ Karl Marlantes

  • Iran has been pretty vocal in their support of Syria. If I was Petraeus and wanted to send a message to Ahmadinejad about what I could do, I would do it in Syria

Leave a Reply